Only 1% of cases worldwide serious or critical?

political analyst

https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6180738886001

Sky News Australia presenter Alan Jones reiterated the point made by the World Health Organisation that 99 per cent of coronavirus cases are mild.

See about 1 minute into the video on the page I've linked in this post.

Given that this is coming from the Australian branch of a mainstream news outlet, I don't think it's easy to dismiss.

LessOutragePlz

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6180738886001

Sky News Australia presenter Alan Jones reiterated the point made by the World Health Organisation that 99 per cent of coronavirus cases are mild.

See about 1 minute into the video on the page I've linked in this post.

Given that this is coming from the Australian branch of a mainstream news outlet, I don't think it's easy to dismiss.

Does this mean that we can open all the pubs?

endacl

1% of hundreds of millions is a lot of people coming down with a serious illness.

political analyst

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Does this mean that we can open all the pubs?

I'm not in a position to answer that.

endacl

political analyst wrote: »

I'm not in a position to answer that.

That’s your most insightful, astute, and analytical post so far on this site.

Well done you.

political analyst

endacl wrote: »

1% of hundreds of millions is a lot of people coming down with a serious illness.

If people whose lives would be endangered by infection are cocooning much of the time and wearing surgical masks (People with serious underlying problems can buy them in pharmacies) then there won't be a huge number of infected people needing hospital treatment.

If Person A has only mild symptoms of what may or may not be Covid and everyone else A has been in contact with has taken appropriate precautions in A's presence, then it's better if A stays at home for a fortnight and says nothing to health professionals.

political analyst

endacl wrote: »

That’s your most insightful, astute, and analytical post so far on this site.

Well done you.

'Political Analyst' is my username and nothing more!

Boggles

What an absolute dribbling simpleton.

According to worldometers stats, there are currently 6,866,515 active cases of which 60,568 (1%) are serious/critical.

The actual figure is probably much lower than that as well. It really is anyone's guess how many people have already had it and had no symptoms or extremely mild symptoms.

Alf Veedersane

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6180738886001

Sky News Australia presenter Alan Jones reiterated the point made by the World Health Organisation that 99 per cent of coronavirus cases are mild.

See about 1 minute into the video on the page I've linked in this post.

Given that this is coming from the Australian branch of a mainstream news outlet, I don't think it's easy to dismiss.

The WHO never said a case that wasn't critical would, by default, be considered mild.

There's a not insignificant number of people who won't be considered critical but would be hospitalised and needing oxygen in many cases. That's not a mild infection.

In Ireland, 1.5% were critical cases ending up in ICU. If the rest were mild, then there wouldn't have been 3,411 (11.8%) admitted to hospital.

He does spout a lot of guff that sort of ruins his ultimate point. Comparing Sweden with NYC was where I had to stop it.

facehugger99

endacl wrote: »

1% of hundreds of millions is a lot of people coming down with a serious illness.

and it's 99 time more people not coming down with a serious illness.

circadian

How many more threads are you going to do on Aussie covid stuff OP?

political analyst

circadian wrote: »

How many more threads are you going to do on Aussie covid stuff OP?

This is about how an Australian TV presenter's point of view on the global pandemic. The other OP is about the state of Victoria.

Boggles

political analyst wrote: »

This is about how an Australian TV presenter's point of view on the global pandemic. The other OP is about the state of Victoria.

Why is an Australian tv presenters view on the pandemic any way valid or relevant?

What does Phil Schofiled think about it?

political analyst

Boggles wrote: »

Why is an Australian tv presenters view on the pandemic any way valid or relevant?

What does Phil Schofiled think about it?

Because Alan Jones is a presenter on the Australian version of Sky News.

Schofield is not a presenter of a news/current affairs programme.

CalamariFritti

endacl wrote: »

1% of hundreds of millions is a lot of people coming down with a serious illness.

There are 26 million confirmed cases to date. Not hundreds of millions.

Also considering that initially we forecasted fatality rates of 1% or 2% or godknowswhatthecraziescameoutwith it is quite remarkable. Nobody knew anything at the start. Fair enough. But we can't continue to ignore what we learn about this just because it doesnt support the initial reaction. Only thing worse than not reacting at all would be to remain in shock freeze just because.

Alf Veedersane

political analyst wrote: »

Because Alan Jones is a presenter on the Australian version of Sky News.

Schofield is not a presenter of a news/current affairs programme.

After watching that video, I'd sooner listen to Gordon the Gopher than either of them.

Boggles

political analyst wrote: »

Because Alan Jones is a presenter on the Australian version of Sky News.

Schofield is not a presenter of a news/current affairs programme.

Why should I give a shiny shíté what a news presenter thinks?

Especially an Australian one on sky bloody news?

Are you trawling the internet trying to find what ever simpleton aligns with your views and making threads about them?

Glenomra

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6180738886001

Sky News Australia presenter Alan Jones reiterated the point made by the World Health Organisation that 99 per cent of coronavirus cases are mild.

See about 1 minute into the video on the page I've linked in this post.

Given that this is coming from the Australian branch of a mainstream news outlet, I don't think it's easy to dismiss.

wonderful news but the panic merchants won't want to hear this.

Bandana boy

According to Harvard's epidemiologist Professor , this could infect 40-70% of the World
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/us/2020/05/01/pandemic-experts-sobering-warning-coronavirus-future-john-barry-marc-lipsitch-ebof-vpx.cnn


So 1% being serious would affect 32-54 Million people

circadian

I swear to god op you're giving me an aneurism with the idiocy on display.

bb1234567

Deleted User wrote: »

According to worldometers stats, there are currently 6,866,515 active cases of which 60,568 (1%) are serious/critical.

The actual figure is probably much lower than that as well. It really is anyone's guess how many people have already had it and had no symptoms or extremely mild symptoms.

The worldometer is critical only. In most countries the hospitalisation rate is about 3x-5x times higher than the rate of ICU admission.

bodhrandude

It all comes down to doctors and scientists learning about the virus and treating cases better through time and experience.

paw patrol

covid can be a serious illness that we should be wary off
But the restrictions on our lives are excessive, dracionian and will cause lasting damage for years.



A whole a boll0cks dreamt up on the basis for very poorly designed models by some numpties in academia.

Boggles

paw patrol wrote: »

covid can be a serious illness that we should be wary off
But the restrictions on our lives are excessive, dracionian and will cause lasting damage for years.



A whole a boll0cks dreamt up on the basis for very poorly designed models by some numpties in academia.

The vast majority of restrictions are gone, it's pretty much business as usual.

If a couple of months of restrictions is going to cause lasting damage for years, then we as a species might as well become extinct.

Can you imagine the people who lived through the great wars and similar pandemics would think if they heard this absolute cowardly hyperbolic scutter?

I might email Yemen and see if they will set up a Gofundpage for the poor pets.

fits

CNN projecting death toll of 400000 in US by January 1st due to compliance waning and other winter factors coming into play.

paw patrol

Boggles wrote: »

The vast majority of restrictions are gone, it's pretty much business as usual.

If a couple of months of restrictions is going to cause lasting damage for years, then we as a species might as well become extinct.

Can you imagine the people who lived through the great wars and similar pandemics would think if they heard this absolute cowardly hyperbolic scutter?

I might email Yemen and see if they will set up a Gofundpage for the poor pets.

a rational response :rolleyes:
Most restrictions are not gone, this is just plain incorrect.

Yes most business sectors are open but due to restrictions on those open businesses like social distancing for example they aren't functioning at capacity or close to it.

Sports and social clubs are "open" but massive restrictions on participation and viewing.

Pubs / restaurants and tourism - there are a million posts here already.
Public Transport etc.. all at much lower numbers.



so stop talking nonsense. there are huge restrictions on society



As for your point on previous wars/famine etc..
that was then this is now.
You are comparing apples and oranges and you know it too.

The world in terms of hygiene and medical invention is so far removed from the times of the Spanish flu (which people love referring too) that we might as well be on a different planet to back then.



Teaching a generation of kids to be fearful of infection and to avoid social contact will have ramification.
We still have the medical cost to this for other non covid matters - suicide, cancer etc. And finally what will impact us all - the financial bill. Another sh1tstorm is ahead like what we had in 2007/2008.

But carry on , believe and parrot the soundbites from the TV and the Dail.

Boggles

paw patrol wrote: »

We still have the medical cost to this for other non covid matters - suicide, cancer etc.

You do know people who contracted Covid also had cancer and unfortunately died?

It's what they mean when the phrase "underlining condition" is bandied about.

So it seems you are very concerned about people with cancer, which is the right thing to be. It's an absolute scourge and unfortunately the majority of treatments for cancer make the patients extremely vulnerable to disease, especially a novel one which has extremely adverse effects on the immune system.

One very important reason mitigation measures were introduced were to protect people with cancer and with other diseases and ailments which would increase mortality rates if they contracted Covid 19, of course if our hospitals had to reduce capacity more because of outbreaks and surges, then then mortality rates would increase further.

Now all that may be a little bit nuanced for a edgelord sky news presenter dribbling nonsense to a certain breed of ignorance, but I imagine you, given your concern about people with cancer would whole heartily agree that giving them the best chance during a once in a generation pandemic is the right thing to do, and if we can only spend 2 hours in the pub, then it's not really a major sacrifice is it?

Correct?

tobefrank321

1% are severe and require hospitalisation.
Of that 1% perhaps 1/10th will end up in ICU.
Of the 1/10th who end up in ICU, perhaps 4/5ths will survive based on Ireland ICU survival rate (79%)

So 1/5th of 1/10th of 1% may die in ICU. Many of whom were already seriously ill.

It does impact already seriously ill elderly more so, many of whom don't make it to ICU, but many who were already not far off death already.

Boggles

tobefrank321 wrote: »

1% are severe and require hospitalisation.
Of that 1% perhaps 1/10th will end up in ICU.

The hospitalization rate depending on the profile of infection is between 2-4%.

Almost 50% of Covid patients who required hospitalization were under the age of 64.

The vast majority of the population of Ireland is under this age bracket.

If only this age bracket was to get infected in large enough surges it still has the very real potential to crash emergency care, which has a massive knock on effect for the mortality of non covid patients.

The death rate is based on infection rate, infection profile, this varies with how hospitals can cope with treatment.

Again, the primary strategy is to protect emergency care and by extension the hospitals and hospital staff.

People continuously and wrongly judge this pandemic by death rate, it is only one concern.

Western Capitalism doesn't crash itself for the crack, what ever some tabloid news reporting cretin would like you to believe.

The_Brood

endacl wrote: »

1% of hundreds of millions is a lot of people coming down with a serious illness.

The number of people sick or needing hospital due to other sicknesses/life situations (like transport accidents) is a lot, a lot bigger.

The math has never, ever made sense to me how the world was shut down because we happened to add one more sickness to an already large list.

is_that_so

The_Brood wrote: »

The number of people sick or needing hospital due to other sicknesses/life situations (like transport accidents) is a lot, a lot bigger.

The math has never, ever made sense to me how the world was shut down because we happened to add one more sickness to an already large list.

It's the knock on effect on the health system. Italy was at about 6k a day at one stage, so working off the 15% for hospital cases that's 900 new admissions a day. Using 5% for ICU and that's 300 a day. HIQA in April suggested a median stay of 7-8 days in ICU so you can see what Day 6 looks like - nearly 2,000 in ICU. The answer is to reduce overall daily cases over time by shutting everything down.

bobbyy gee

They don't mention the long term effects I know some one who has had it 2 times possibly 3 but they only got tested 2 times. In America whole family's died
https://www.hackensackmeridianhealth.org/HealthU/2020/07/29/what-are-the-long-term-effects-of-covid-19/

Boggles

The_Brood wrote: »

The number of people sick or needing hospital due to other sicknesses/life situations (like transport accidents) is a lot, a lot bigger.

The math has never, ever made sense to me how the world was shut down because we happened to add one more sickness to an already large list.

It's currently the 3rd leading cause of death in America, the first cases was reported in January. So that happened in less than 9 months through a summer.

So no it's just not "one more sickness".